Delhi High Court Upholds Termination of Probationary Constable for Frequent Absences

The Court rules that the termination was administrative and non-punitive, dismissing the Tribunal's reinstatement order.

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of a probationary constable, Devender Singh, from the Delhi Police for frequent unauthorized absences during his training period. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Madhu Jain, overturned an earlier order by the Central Administrative Tribunal that had directed Singh's reinstatement.

The case involved the termination of Singh under Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, after he was found frequently absent without permission during his training at the Police Training School in Wazirabad, Delhi. Singh's appeal to the Tribunal had resulted in an order for his reinstatement, which the Government of NCTD challenged in the High Court.

The High Court emphasized the distinction between termination simpliciter and punitive dismissal, noting that Singh's termination was based on unsuitability rather than misconduct. The Court observed that frequent absences during training were the motive for assessing Singh's general suitability for police service, not the foundation for punitive action. The ruling clarified that the absence of formal inquiry or findings of guilt reinforced the administrative nature of the termination.

The judgment also addressed the Tribunal's reasoning, stating that the Appellate Authority's explanatory observations in the rejection of Singh's appeal did not render the original termination order stigmatic or punitive. The Court concluded that the Tribunal erred in merging the original termination order with the Appellate Authority's observations.

In its decision, the High Court underscored that the termination was conducted under the provisions of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, without any imputation of misconduct or stigma, thus not attracting the protection of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.

The High Court's ruling reaffirms the administrative discretion vested in authorities to assess the suitability of probationary employees based on overall conduct and performance during training. The decision sets a precedent for handling similar cases of termination during probationary periods, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between motive and foundation in termination cases.

Bottom Line:

Termination of a probationary government servant under Rule 5(1) of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, on the grounds of unsuitability during training, is a termination simpliciter and not punitive in nature unless it carries stigma or is based on proven misconduct.

Statutory provision(s): Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, Rule 5(1), Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India.

Govt. of NCTD v. Devender Singh, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2814154